How to park in a Supermarket car park? I had an accident last year and need advice?

PHIL P

You are not at fault.
This action was essentially an "overtake", and the other driver did this at a time and place where it was "not safe to do so" - contrary to the highway code.

The issue of indicating is neither here or there, and anyway, don't say that you "did not indicate" - you are not obliged to, so just don't mention it.

"I was turning into a parking space, when a guy tried to overtake me and collided with the side of my car"

Always remember - cars are replaceable - people are not.
Nobody was injured - so everything can be put right again.

Hope this helps.

cuddles_gb

Indicating would be good - but at the end of the day, he hit you, he should not be driving like that in a car-park. He would be found to be at fault 100% by the insurance / police.

ascoile

He hit you his fault.

However, some observations.
It is normal to overtake on the right.
If he was following you quite close and you say he was speeding then we presume you must have been also.
Hopefully you would have got witnesses.

grugrupingpong

He hit you and he should not be so close def his fault

chris at hornchurch

here we have one of numerous car park issues. whilst it may be polite to indicate it is not required as would be on the road by traffic laws and the highway code.
he is guilty of approaching too rapidly and being unable to avoid a collision.
On a blame front most insurance companies would probably take the view there was some fault attached to you for not indicating but only slight. The party who impacted you car would be held at least 80% at fault.
that said with car parks most insurance companies will require a witness to verify any statements made be you or the other driver. you can check and see if the supermarket has CCTV footage but do it quick they dint hold onto it for long. That would be sufficient to show who is mainly at fault. In my own viewpoint I would have thought you had a valid claim for the whole amount of damage as it is unsafe to drive at speed in ANY car park therefore he was driving at too high a speed for the conditions and in fact the result shows the affect of his poor driving. good luck. PS never admit liability and if you was quick witted you could have said I was indicating!! a fact that can only be verified by CCTV or a witness. not honest maybe but..

speric07

You are not at fault. Do not say you did not indicate as you can incriminate yourself, just say he went into the back of you as he was driving excessvily fast.

A supermarket car park is private property and therefore does not adhere to road traffic regulations so there is no need to use indicators anyway.

Hope this helps, keep saying he went into the back of you.... and you will be fine.

Mlb`nOzzy

I would say its he`s fault, the driver behind someone should always keep a safe distance. insurance would back you up on this. not using a indicator is wrong but assuming where someone is going to and when turn is just plain stupid.

Alec B

unfortunately a supermarket is not covered for accidents and police will not get involved as it is private ground ,so both parties must come to a mutual agreement . good luck

Britbloke

Trying to look at this dispassionately:

I suspect what happened is that before you turned right into the space, you swung to the left to get the angle right. This might have given the driver behind the impression that you were stopping - particularly if you weren't indicating right.

Being the impatient git he obviously was, he couldn't wait to be sure you were stopping and decided to overtake.

I'm afraid I think you are both to blame. You - for not signalling and failing to check your exterior right mirror before turning to make sure it was clear to turn.

Him - for driving dangerously and too fast.

Clarabella

You should never believe indicators an nor should he, how many times do you see people come off a roundabout and have there indicator on for 1/2 a mile?. If he bumped you he can not prove you didn't have your indicators on! he was driving without due care and attention, he is at fault.
Hope this helps.

T C

50/50. You should have indicated, he shouldn't have been driving like a maniac :o)

Enter Your Message or Comment

User Name:
User Email:
Post a comment: